There is a common cliché, “The more things change, the more they remain the same.” With Modi 3.0, however, its inverse may be more apposite: the more things remain the same, the more they change.
What do I mean by this? Modi 3.0 seems as keen as before to render the opposition inconsequential, in addition to illegitimate, using every trick in the book. But it is not going to be so easy. With 233 seats in the 543-member Lok Sabha, not only is the opposition INDIA bloc only seven seats short of BJP’s 240, but it is much more vocal and visible than in Narendra Modi’s previous two terms as prime minister.
Therefore, no matter how much the entire ecosystem along with media supporters keep up the appearance that nothing has changed, the fact is it is not business as usual. More significantly, the prospect of ushering in post-independence India’s ‘second republic’ now appears quite remote.
This brings us to the central issue. Democracy, hailed as the custodian of freedom and pluralistic society, stands at a precipice in today’s politically charged and divided environment. But diversity, weaponised into divisiveness, threatens the fabric of our nation. Especially if we are not careful to step back from the abyss when it comes to the game of political brinkmanship.
This stark reality was showcased in the shocking assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump during a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania on July 12. It was an event rippling with consequences, the turning point in an electoral race that had become increasingly toxic.
Many think the remaining part of the campaign is perfunctory. For, like Pulwama in 2019, this is the pivot on which the race will turn in Trump’s favour—especially as Trump clambered onto his feet despite being injured. With blood trickling down his face after the bullet ripped through his right ear, he repeatedly raised his fist saying “Fight, fight, fight…” The courage and fearlessness he displayed is bound to earn him the approval of undecided voters. This was immediately evident in endorsements from influencers no less powerful or wealthy than Elon Musk and Bill Ackman.
There have been three not-so-serious attempts on Trump prior to this near-deadly one. Had Trump not moved his head or had the bullet been aimed a couple of millimetres away, it might have been the end. Not only of Trump, but of democracy as we know it in the US. The reaction would have been so serious, even riotous, that the remaining campaign would have been marred by unprecedented hostility.
Thankfully, we have been saved of all that.
The day after the attempt, both Trump and President Joe Biden tried to dial the temperature down among their supporters and called for national unity. But then Trump rode triumphantly into the Republican convention in Milwaukee on Monday, secure and his injured ear bandaged. Will he, however, be able to desist from pouring vitriol on Biden through the rest of the campaign? The voting public will blame the present administration for security lapses and all their previous attempts to block Trump from contesting. Apart from the blame game, the attempted assassination will pin the badge of ‘verifiable victim’ on Trump, energising his chest-thumping MAGA supporters.
What have seen unfolding, whether in the US or India, is the broader trend of escalating political violence and partisanship in democracies. This murderous assault on a political leader in the free world should compel us to examine the dangerous path large and diverse democracies like the United States and India are treading. The lesson is simple: democratic dividends can turn into disasters if diverse societies and large democracies do not heal bitter political divisions and social schisms.
This is the chilling reality sobering outcome of the July 13 shooting. To safeguard dividends of democracy and ensure its sustainability, we must avow our universal and unequivocal commitment to civic decency rather than bitter divisiveness in public life. Furthermore, there needs to be a covenant between political leaders and all stake holders to eschew violence as a legitimate instrument for resolving disputes.
In the US, the embittered polarities between the Republicans and Democrats have often slid into a quagmire of vicious animosity and disrespect. Similarly, India’s multi-coloured fabric of religions, languages and cultures, with their own unique political expressions, have, at times, seen national concerns and social unity frayed not just at its edges but at the very centre. As in Uttar Pradesh, which voted decisively away, if not entirely against, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party in the recent Lok Sabha polls. It was this turn that cost Modi 3.0 its majority as well as the authority to usher in what many had termed as our second republic.
The inherent promise of democracy is rooted in the peaceful arbitration of conflicting interests. However, when the resolution mechanisms get supplanted by violence, the notion of democratic dividends from increased political participation and accountability quickly regresses into disaster. This downward spiral is precipitated by the normalisation and endorsement of violence as a means of political expression. Incidents of political intimidation and aggression mar the democratic landscape, creating a culture of fear that undermines the very principles of freedom and diversity.
At the heart of restoring the equilibrium is the need for decency in public life—an unwavering commitment to civility, reasoned dialogue, and respect for differing viewpoints. Political leaders and public figures should exemplify this decency, setting the tone for both discourse and behaviour. The penchant for ad hominem attacks and inflammatory rhetoric only fuels divisiveness, eroding the thin veneer of societal cohesion.
Whether in the US or India, the path forward depends on our collective repudiation of violence as the means of sorting out political differences. This necessitates a broad-based consensus spanning the political spectrum. Partisan acrimony must be shelved in favour of collaborative effort toward de-escalating tensions and bridging divides. National unity is the need of the hour in both societies.
Our motto cannot be to grab or retain power by hook or crook.
(Views are personal)
(Tweets @MakrandParanspe)
Makarand R Paranjape | Author and commentator